A Trump Case Judge Just Shot Himself In The Foot With This Horrific Comment
Welcome to the circus... Don't forget the peanuts!
SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY:
For God is not unjust so as to forget your work and the love which you have shown toward His name, in having ministered and in still ministering to the saints.
- Hebrews 6:10 NASB95
TODAY’S READS:
The US has Lost its First-World Status - Brownstone Institute
The Fed Has No Plan, and Is Just Hoping for the Best - Mises Institute
Hamas Terrorist Attack Drove the Left’s Growing Antisemitism Into the Open - American Greatness
TODAY’S FINDS:
JBL Live 660NCs are 50% Off For Now - Anazon
Sony’s EXTRA BASS Portable Bluetooth Speaker Is 50% Off For A Limited Time - Amazon
Hide Me Is Having A Limited-Time Sale On Their VPN. Just $2.22/month While The Deal Lasts - Hide.Me
TODAY’S SUBSTACK:
MIGHT AS WELL HAVE SAID “I’M ONLY HERE TO DESTROY TRUMP”
*footnotes can be found at the bottom of the post
When I wrote the introductory post to this substack, I said there would be some substack posts devoted to marketing. I want to make good on that promise, since marketing and sales are vital skills that spill over into literally every other career. So I am introducing a new format where Fridays are devoted to an analysis of the most boneheaded statement of the week and what should have been done instead and why.
That being said, this week’s boneheaded statement comes from New York County Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron, who said “I am not here to hear what he has to say, now sit down.” [1]
According to Breitbart’s synopsis of the courtroom that day, Trump had been rather longwinded with his answers, which is pretty par for the course with Trump when you ask him questions. But Engoron’s response was not only disturbing from a judge’s bench perspective, but also just terrible for PR.
side note: for a deep dive into the disturbing and unconstitutional assaults onto Trump and why it matters for our civil liberties and what the government might do next, Alan Dershowitz’s Get Trump is a noteworthy read.
A judge, first of all, is a symbol of impartiality and blind justice. Ask people on the street what the judicial system is supposed to be, and you will likely hear responses such as “blind” or “impartial.” So a judge literally repeating, multiple times, that he does not want to hear the accused’s response is not something that would normally bare well with the general public.
Granted, you could argue that Trump was “pushing and pushing” the judge. [2] But there are many courtroom orders a judge can employ that do not end with saying, in the minds of the general public, you don’t want to give the accused the right to defend himself. Additionally, a judge is not supposed to lose his cool. This is not impartial behavior.
But that seems to be the heart of the issue. We have a judge who is literally deciding whether Trump’s entire New York enterprise will live or die saying stuff akin to not wanting to give Trump basic rights such as the right to defend himself before the accused. Not to mention, Trump’s lawyers can use this in so many ways to destroy this judge’s name (and they have).
So what could the judge have done differently?
Well, for starters, holding someone in contempt of court looks a lot better than saying, either wittingly or unwittingly, you don’t want the accused to defend himself. This was one avenue that he could have taken.
He could have also ordered Trump to answer simply yes and no to questions. While this could violate freedom of speech, judges do periodically ask this of those in the courtroom. It isn’t uncommon.
So what can the judge do now? At this rate, if he cares about his public image, he can do one of two things:
He can conduct the trial from here on out, and when Trump is answering questions, let him talk unfettered until New York’s attorney rejects over relevance, showing he has no desire to prevent the accused from defending himself. This may or may not repair his public image, but certainly looks better than appearing to steamroll the accused.
He can recuse himself altogether. This is probably easier due to media reports of bias against Trump by Engoron that have even surfaced in UK news outlets like the Daily Mail, [3] let alone made the rounds on social media and the news circuit here in the U.S.
If Engoron’s goal is to stop Trump from running in 2024, then he is only making it easier for Trump to win. In other countries, the reform candidate, the one that has the full bearing of legal and investigative pressure onto them while running for public office, often has the true support of the public. [4] [5]
Ironically, the more investigations and legal issues thrown at Trump, the more favorable he will look over the incumbent. This is shown in polling from RealClearPolitics. [6] So, essentially, IF Engoron truly dislikes Trump, and IF he is truly working with the DA to end Trump’s presidential career (after all, the DA suing him has said, if elected, he would remove Trump from office [7]), then this is the complete opposite way to go about it.
But if Engoron is not actually party to trying to keep Trump out of the White House, then he has a lot of work ahead of him to rebuild his reputation as an impartial judge. After all, he gagged Trump from taking about the trial, then loosely gagged his lawyers from commenting, all while letting the DA’s office say whatever they want. [8] Hardly impartial by anyone’s standards.
To remedy this, simply remove the gag order. If Trump is truly guily of what New York claims he is guilty of, then the facts will show it, and the general public deserves the chance to make their own decision, since they will be voting for this man for President in a year’s time anyways.
By gagging Trump, it only builds unnecessary clout without Trump even having to open his mouth. And this will, undoubtedly, propel him into the White House. Once in the White House, Engoron could be subject to retaliation and investigations because of his conduct. While this isn’t really Trump’s style, it still could happen.
A great piece of advice to help prevent anyone from falling into this situation is to speak and act like you will be sued for your statements. If your words and actions are untouchable, then your message will be better heard, and you will win the lawsuit.
SOURCES:
[2]
[3] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12566635/Donald-Trump-Mar-Lago-estate.html
[6] https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/us/general-election-trump-vs-biden-7383.html
[8] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-fraud-trial-gag-order-judge-arthur-engoron/
*This post may contain affiliate links.